Federal Register / Vol. 71, No.
62 / Friday, March 31, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
* * * * * Information (CBI) or other information
[FR Doc. 06–3106 Filed 3–30–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R03–OAR–2006–0151; FRL–8051–6]
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; State of
Maryland; Revised Definition of
Volatile Organic Compounds
AGENCY: Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
SUMMARY: EPA is taking direct final
action on revisions to the Maryland
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
submitted by the Maryland Department
of Environment (MDE). The revisions
update the SIP’s reference to the EPA
definition of volatile organic
compounds (VOC). EPA is approving
these revisions to the State of
Maryland’s SIP in accordance with the
requirements of the Clean Air Act.
DATES: This rule is effective on May 30,
2006 without further notice, unless EPA
receives adverse written comment by
May 1, 2006. If EPA receives such
comments, it will publish a timely
withdrawal of the direct final rule in the
Federal Register and inform the public
that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID Number R03–
OAR–2006–0151 by one of the following
methods:
A. http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting
comments.
B. E-mail: frankford.harold@epa.gov.
C. Mail: EPA–R03–OAR–2006–0151,
Harold A. Frankford, Office of Air
Programs, Mailcode 3AP20, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency,
Region III, 1650 Arch Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103.
D. Hand Delivery: At the previously-
listed EPA Region III address. Such
deliveries are only accepted during the
Docket’s normal hours of operation, and
special arrangements should be made
for deliveries of boxed information.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–R03–OAR–2006–
0151. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change, and may be
hsrobinson on PROD1PC61 with RULES
made available online at http://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:51 Mar 30, 2006 Jkt 208001
16239
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through http://
www.regulations.gov or e-mail. The
http://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an e-mail comment directly
to EPA without going through http://
www.regulations.gov, your e-mail
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment and with any
disk or CD–ROM you submit. If EPA
cannot read your comment due to
technical difficulties and cannot contact
you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of
encryption, and be free of any defects or
viruses.
Docket: All documents in the
electronic docket are listed in the http://
www.regulations.gov index. Although
listed in the index, some information is
not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Certain other
material, such as copyrighted material,
is not placed on the Internet and will be
publicly available only in hard copy
form. Publicly available docket
materials are available either
electronically in http://
www.regulations.gov or in hard copy
during normal business hours at the Air
Protection Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region III, 1650
Arch Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19103. Copies of the State submittal are
available at the Maryland Department of
the Environment, 1800 Washington
Boulevard, Suite 705, Baltimore,
Maryland 21230.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Harold A. Frankford at (215) 814–2108,
or by e-mail at
frankford.harold@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Summary of SIP Revisions
On October 31, 2005, the State of
Maryland submitted a formal revision
(No. 05–05) to its SIP. The SIP revision
consists of a revised reference to the
Federal definition of VOC at 40 CFR
51.100(s) which is found at COMAR
26.11.01.01B(53), Maryland’s definition
PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\31MRR1.SGM
for ‘‘volatile organic compounds
(VOC)’’. These regulatory revisions
became effective on September 12, 2005.
II. Description of the SIP Revision
Maryland has amended COMAR
26.11.01.01B(53) to update the Federal
reference for incorporation of the EPA
definition of VOC found at 40 CFR
51.100(s) from the 2002 edition (the
currently SIP-approved version) to the
2004 edition of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR).
III. Final Action
EPA is approving revisions to
COMAR 26.11.01.01B(53) of the
Maryland SIP to update the references
to the EPA definition of VOC found at
40 CFR 51.100(s) in effect as of 12/31/
2004. EPA is publishing this rule
without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial
amendment and anticipates no adverse
comment since the revisions are
administrative changes to the state
regulations. However, in the ‘‘Proposed
Rules’’ section of today’s Federal
Register, EPA is publishing a separate
document that will serve as the proposal
to approve the SIP revision if adverse
comments are filed. This rule will be
effective on May 30, 2006 without
further notice unless EPA receives
adverse comment by May 1, 2006. If
EPA receives adverse comment, EPA
will publish a timely withdrawal in the
Federal Register informing the public
that the rule will not take effect. EPA
will address all public comments in a
subsequent final rule based on the
proposed rule. EPA will not institute a
second comment period on this action.
Any parties interested in commenting
must do so at this time.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order
Reviews
A. General Requirements
Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR
51735, October 4, 1993), this action is
not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ and
therefore is not subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget. For
this reason, this action is also not
subject to Executive Order 13211,
‘‘Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use’’ (66 FR 28355, May
22, 2001). This action merely approves
state law as meeting Federal
requirements and imposes no additional
requirements beyond those imposed by
state law. Accordingly, the
Administrator certifies that this rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
31MRR1
 16240 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 62 / Friday, March 31, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because this
rule approves pre-existing requirements
under state law and does not impose
any additional enforceable duty beyond
that required by state law, it does not
contain any unfunded mandate or
significantly or uniquely affect small
governments, as described in the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Public Law 104–4). This rule also does
not have tribal implications because it
will not have a substantial direct effect
on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This
action also does not have Federalism
implications because it does not have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255,
August 10, 1999). This action merely
approves a state rule implementing a
Federal standard, and does not alter the
relationship or the distribution of power
and responsibilities established in the
Clean Air Act. This rule also is not
subject to Executive Order 13045
‘‘Protection of Children from
Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks’’ (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997),
because it is not economically
significant. In reviewing SIP
submissions, EPA’s role is to approve
state choices, provided that they meet
EPA-APPROVED REGULATIONS IN THE MARYLAND SIP
Code of Maryland ad-
ministrative regulations
(COMAR) citation
* *
26.11.01.01B(53) ........... Definitions-definition of volatile organic com-
pound (VOC).
* *
hsrobinson on PROD1PC61 with RULES
VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:51 Mar 30, 2006 Jkt 208001
the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In this
context, in the absence of a prior
existing requirement for the State to use
voluntary consensus standards (VCS),
EPA has no authority to disapprove a
SIP submission for failure to use VCS.
It would thus be inconsistent with
applicable law for EPA, when it reviews
a SIP submission, to use VCS in place
of a SIP submission that otherwise
satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air
Act. Thus, the requirements of section
12(d) of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This
rule does not impose an information
collection burden under the provisions
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
B. Submission to Congress and the
Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides
that before a rule may take effect, the
agency promulgating the rule must
submit a rule report, which includes a
copy of the rule, to each House of the
Congress and to the Comptroller General
of the United States. EPA will submit a
report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate,
the U.S. House of Representatives, and
the Comptroller General of the United
States prior to publication of the rule in
the Federal Register. This rule is not a
‘‘major rule’’ as defined by 5 U.S.C.
804(2).
C. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean
Air Act, petitions for judicial review of
State effective
Title/subject
date
26.11.01.01 General Administrative Provisions
* *
9/12/05 3/1/06 [Insert page
* *
PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\31MRR1.SGM
this action must be filed in the United
States Court of Appeals for the
appropriate circuit by May 30, 2006.
Filing a petition for reconsideration by
the Administrator of this final rule does
not affect the finality of this rule for the
purposes of judicial review nor does it
extend the time within which a petition
for judicial review may be filed, and
shall not postpone the effectiveness of
such rule or action. This action to
approve Maryland’s revised definition
of ‘‘volatile organic compound (VOC)’’
may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements.
(See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air
pollution control, Ozone, Volatile
organic compounds.
Dated: March 21, 2006.
William Early,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region III.
■ 40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:
PART 52—[AMENDED]
■ 1. The authority citation for part 52
continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart V—Maryland
■ 2. In § 52.1070, the table in paragraph
(c) is amended by revising the entry for
COMAR 26.11.01.01B(53) to read as
follows:
52.1070 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
Additional explanation/
EPA approval
citation at 40 CFR
date
52.1100
* * *
Definition reflects the
number where the version of 40 CFR
document begins]. 51.100(s) in effect as
of 12/31/2004.
* * *
31MRR1
 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 62 / Friday, March 31, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
* * * * * objectives. The make-or-buy program is
[FR Doc. 06–3107 Filed 3–30–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
48 CFR Parts 901 and 970
RIN 1991–AB64
Acquisition Regulation: Make-or-Buy
Plans
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: The Department of Energy
(DOE) is amending the Department of
Energy Acquisition Regulation (DEAR)
to revise its requirements for contractor
make-or-buy plans. The Department
published a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking on December 15, 2004,
proposing to eliminate its program
requiring make or buy analyses and
plans from its management and
operating (M&O) contractors.
DATES: Effective Date: May 1, 2006.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Richard Langston, U.S. Department of
Energy, MA–61, 1000 Independence
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585,
Telephone (202) 287–1339 or submit
electronically to
Richard.Langston@hq.doe.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
II. Discussion of Public Comments
III. Section-by-Section Analysis
IV. Procedural Requirements
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
B. Review Under Executive Order 12988
C. Review Under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act
D. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction
Act
E. Review Under the National
Environmental Policy Act
F. Review Under Executive Order 13132
G. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995
H. Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 1999
I. Review Under Executive Order 13211
J. Review Under the Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 2001
K. Review Under the Small Business
Regulatory Fairness Act of 1996
L. Approval by the Office of the Secretary
of Energy
I. Background
DOE now has more than eight years
of experience with the make-or-buy
policy it established in 1997. All M&O
hsrobinson on PROD1PC61 with RULES
contractors have approved make-or-buy
plans in place. The Department has
evaluated the operation of the make-or-
buy policy and the effect that policy has
had in achieving the Department’s
VerDate Aug<31>2005 14:51 Mar 30, 2006 Jkt 208001
not delivering value to the Department
commensurate with the costs of its
implementation.
The Department conducted a number
of assessments since establishing the
current make-or-buy plan requirements
and implemented a number of actions
intended to improve the manner in
which DOE and its contractors
implemented the make-or-buy
requirements. The conclusion drawn
from the most recent assessment is that
there is little evidence that these plans
are producing the efficiencies and cost
savings anticipated by the Department.
The Department has determined that the
lack of measurable progress and costs of
complying and monitoring compliance
with the make-or-buy policy outweigh
any potential benefits to the
Department.
There are multiple approaches to
achieving cost efficiencies and
operational effectiveness under a
contract, and the Department has made
great strides with its other contract
reform initiatives. The make-or-buy plan
requirements have not increased
efficiency and the Department is
amending the DEAR to eliminate the
requirement that M&O contractors
prepare and maintain formal make-or-
buy plans.
II. Discussion of Public Comments
Only one comment was received in
response to our December 15, 2004
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The
reviewer suggested that, rather than
eliminate the make-or-buy review
analysis, the Department introduce a 5-
part alternative make-or-buy system
which would include consolidation of
identified products or services into a
DOE-wide plan.
The Department has evaluated the
suggested revisions to the make-or-buy
process. The make-or-buy process was
ideally meant to be a system for
categorizing all M&O contract internal
work activities as ‘‘make’’ or ‘‘buy’’
activities. ‘‘Make’’ activities are core
competencies critical to the mission
success that are not available for
outsourcing. ‘‘Buy’’ activities are non-
core work activities that provide
strategic support to core competencies
that are available for outsourcing.
Contractors use their make-or-buy plans
to evaluate subcontracting opportunities
and improve in-house performance. The
objective of the make-or-buy policy is to
require M&O contractors to operate the
Department’s laboratories, weapons
production plants, and other facilities in
the most cost effective and efficient
manner. The suggested alternative does
not appear to offer advantages in
PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\31MRR1.SGM
16241
fulfilling those needs. Accordingly, the
Department is not pursuing the
suggested alternative.
III. Section-by-Section Analysis
The Department is amending the
DEAR as follows.
1. Sections 901.105 is amended to
delete the reference to the Office of
Management and Budget, OMB control
number for make-or-buy plans.
2. Sections 970.1504–4–1 through
970.1504–4–3 are eliminated.
3. Section 970.1504–5(b) is
eliminated.
4. Section 970.5203–1 is amended to
include outsourcing of functions as a
consideration of efficient and effective
operations.
5. Section 970.5203–2 is amended to
provide a requirement for contractors to
consider outsourcing as a mechanism to
increase improvement in the
management of the contract.
6. Section 970.5215–2 is eliminated.
7. Section 970.5244–1 is amended to
remove and reserve paragraph (n).
IV. Procedural Requirements
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
This regulatory action has been
determined not to be a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866, Regulatory Planning and Review,
(58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993).
Accordingly, this rule is not subject to
review under the Executive Order by the
Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) within the OMB.
B. Review Under Executive Order 12988
With respect to the review of existing
regulations and the promulgation of
new regulations, section 3(a) of
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice
Reform, 61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996),
imposes on Executive agencies the
general duty to adhere to the following
requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting
errors and ambiguity; (2) write
regulations to minimize litigation; and
(3) provide a clear legal standard for
affected conduct rather than a general
standard and promote simplification
and burden reduction. With regard to
the review required by section 3(a),
section 3(b) of Executive Order 12988
specifically requires that Executive
agencies make every reasonable effort to
ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly
specifies the preemptive effect, if any;
(2) clearly specifies any effect on
existing Federal law or regulation; (3)
provides a clear legal standard for
affected conduct while promoting
simplification and burden reduction; (4)
specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5)
adequately defines key terms; and (6)
31MRR1